Re: [technology-pmc] eclipse scout and jshint

[Gunnar Wagenknecht <gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Konstantin,

I understand the use case. But that is not a works-with in my definition. There is zero additional functionality provided by the code whether or not jshint is installed. It's really just configuration for tooling. 

Now, the reason I'm giving you a hard time is the following. I'm concerned that this will set a precedence case. If we continue and go down that path, we also have to ask every project to file works-with CQs for vim/emacs/findbugs/sonar/whatever-tool instructions in source code.

-Gunnar

-- 
Gunnar Wagenknecht
gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, http://guw.io/






> Am 12.10.2015 um 21:05 schrieb Konstantin Komissarchik <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> 
> In this particular case, the comment was added for the express purpose of ensuring that end users do not see certain validation messages when jshint is installed. It’s a pretty clear-cut case of a works with dependency. The project is integrating with jshint, but jshint is not required for full functionality, so works with.
>  
> - Konstantin
>  
>  
> 
> From: Gunnar Wagenknecht
> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2015 11:49 AM
> To: Konstantin Komissarchik
> Cc: Matthias.Zimmermann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;Technology PMC
> Subject: Re: [technology-pmc] eclipse scout and jshint
>  
>  
> > Am 12.10.2015 um 20:39 schrieb Konstantin Komissarchik <konstantin.komissarchik@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > 
> > The issue is that this in the code that’s delivered to end users.
>  
> So is all code at Eclipse.  git.eclipse.org.
>  
> I still don't see a need for a CQ. All that comment does is configure a code scanning/analysis plug-in in some IDE. 
>  
> What if that JavaScript file would contain:
>  
> /* vi: tabstop=4
> */
>  
> Does that require a works-with CQ for vim? 
>  
> -Gunnar